Fracture Mechanics - Crack Propagation and Stress Intensity Factors

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on using finite element analysis in ABAQUS to determine the critical crack length of a part by analyzing stress intensity factors. The user observes that as the crack length increases, the stress intensity factor initially rises but then peaks and decreases without exceeding the material's fracture toughness. This raises questions about whether the crack is arresting, or if there are issues with the constitutive model, the stress intensity factor calculations, or the ABAQUS software itself. The importance of comparing simulation results with experimental measurements is emphasized to validate the findings. Ultimately, real-world testing is suggested as the most reliable method for confirming the analysis, though funding constraints are acknowledged.
UnteljentEnginyr
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I am trying to determine the critical crack length of a part using finite element analysis. The software I am using (ABAQUS) has the ability to perform fracture analysis. I model the part, create a crack, and ABAQUS will output the stress intensity factors (modes I, II, and III) and contour integrals in the area of the crack tip.

Theoretically, in order to determine the critical crack length, I would extend the length of my crack to see how it affects the stress intensity factor. Once the stress intensity factor exceeds the fracture toughness of the material, I'd consider that my critical crack length.

However, I never observe the stress intensity factor exceed the fracture toughness. Initially, the stress intensity factor is increasing as I grow the crack. As I continue to grow the crack, the stress intensity factor reaches a peak and then starts to decrease without ever having exceeded the fracture toughness of the material.

Does this indicate that the crack is arresting and there won't be failure due to the crack?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
UnteljentEnginyr said:
I am trying to determine the critical crack length of a part using finite element analysis. The software I am using (ABAQUS) has the ability to perform fracture analysis. I model the part, create a crack, and ABAQUS will output the stress intensity factors (modes I, II, and III) and contour integrals in the area of the crack tip.

Theoretically, in order to determine the critical crack length, I would extend the length of my crack to see how it affects the stress intensity factor. Once the stress intensity factor exceeds the fracture toughness of the material, I'd consider that my critical crack length.

However, I never observe the stress intensity factor exceed the fracture toughness. Initially, the stress intensity factor is increasing as I grow the crack. As I continue to grow the crack, the stress intensity factor reaches a peak and then starts to decrease without ever having exceeded the fracture toughness of the material.

Does this indicate that the crack is arresting and there won't be failure due to the crack?
Or the constitutive model is wrong, or the model for stress intensity factor is incorrect, or ABAQUS code is wrong.

One needs to compare the calculation against a real experimental measurement to see if the local plastic strain is correct, and if crack propagation rates are correct.
 
Yea, I realize a real world test would be the best option at this point. Unfortunately, the people with the money make the calls.
 
Hello! I've been brainstorming on how to prevent a lot of ferrofluid droplets that are in the same container. This is for an art idea that I have (I absolutely love it when science and art come together) where I want it to look like a murmuration of starlings. Here's a link of what they look like: How could I make this happen? The only way I can think of to achieve the desired effect is to have varying droplet sizes of ferrofluid suspended in a clear viscous liquid. Im hoping for the...
Hello everyone! I am curious to learn how laboratories handle in-house chip manufacturing using soft lithography for microfluidics research. In the lab where I worked, only the mask for lithography was made by an external company, whereas the mold and chip fabrication were carried out by us. The process of making PDMS chips required around 30 min–1 h of manual work between prepolymer casting, punching/cutting, and plasma bonding. However, the total time required to make them was around 4...

Similar threads

Back
Top